HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Bribery!! Seth Abramson i...

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 07:57 PM

Bribery!! Seth Abramson is on another roll!! 2nd letter of intent for Moscow tRump tower (w/pics)

Last edited Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:36 PM - Edit history (1)

Thread by @SethAbramson: "THREAD) It's time for America to discuss the SECOND Letter of Intent that Trump signed to build a Trump Tower Moscow—a Letter that was acti […]"
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1069389861537423360.html

**Full Thread in Post 29**

(THREAD) It's time for America to discuss the SECOND Letter of Intent that Trump signed to build a Trump Tower Moscow—a Letter that was active two years earlier than the one we learned of this week and that remained active through 2017. I hope you'll read on for more and RETWEET.


1/ The picture atop this thread is of the "Trump-Agalarov" Trump Tower Moscow—the Trump Tower Moscow that Trump signed a Letter of Intent to build in November 2013 with the direct intervention and assistance of the Kremlin. This Letter was ACTIVE through mid-2017 at the earliest.

2/ Nobody who researches the Trump-Russia case extensively would say that the "Trump-Rozov" Trump Tower Moscow deal—the one we learned of this week—is any *less* nefarious than the "Trump-Agalarov" deal. The problem is *no one seems to fully understand the issue with either one*.

3/ Trump has thus far had success—inexplicably—in convincing media that there was no criminality in him secretly negotiating a multi-billion dollar real estate deal directly with the Kremlin while he was running for president on the most pro-Russia foreign policy in U.S. history.

4/ In fact, both the "Trump-Agalarov" Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent (active: November 2013, at the latest, through mid-2017 or later) and the "Trump-Rozov" Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent (active: October 2015, at the latest, through June 2016 or later) were *criminal*.

5/ To understand why BOTH these Letters of Intent became criminal at some point in their lifespan—whether or not they were illegal at the outset (which the Trump-Rozov Letter might well have been)—requires looking at their histories and shared features and some relevant statutes.

6/ First, we'll look at the history of the "Trump-Agalarov" Letter of Intent that Trump signed in November 2013 (at the latest), which was ACTIVE until its termination sometime in mid-2017 (at the earliest). We know far *more* of the Trump-Agalarov deal than the Trump-Rozov deal.

7/ Agalarov is FAR CLOSER to Vladimir Putin than Trump's partner in the Trump-Rozov deal, Andrey Rozov. Agalarov is Putin's top real estate developer, and was awarded Russia's highest civilian award directly from Putin's hand—two weeks before Trump and Agalarov signed their deal.

8/ A Russian oligarch, Agalarov routinely performs no-bid government contracts for the Kremlin, and is considered a top Putin ally. Moreover, Agalarov and his family members have acted as messengers for Putin, and have discussed their proclivity to do as the Kremlin directs them.

9/ Trump and Agalarov signed their Trump Tower deal in early November 2013, at an EVENT Putin personally permitted to occur (the 2013 Miss Universe pageant), with money from a STATE BANK whose loans Putin can direct, and with the permission of a KREMLIN OFFICIAL Putin controlled.

10/ On the *very day* in November 2013 that Trump and Agalarov signed their multi-billion dollar Trump Tower Moscow deal, Trump received a CALL FROM THE KREMLIN—either directly from Putin or from his lieutenant, Dmitry Peskov—and a WRITTEN MESSAGE FROM PUTIN. But that's not all.

42 replies, 5053 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 42 replies Author Time Post
Reply Bribery!! Seth Abramson is on another roll!! 2nd letter of intent for Moscow tRump tower (w/pics) (Original post)
Roland99 Dec 2 OP
Roland99 Dec 2 #1
Roland99 Dec 2 #5
Roland99 Dec 2 #12
George II Dec 2 #13
Roland99 Dec 2 #16
George II Dec 2 #18
Roland99 Dec 2 #19
erronis Dec 2 #23
Roland99 Dec 2 #20
Roland99 Dec 2 #40
Roland99 Dec 2 #22
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #27
Roland99 Dec 2 #28
Jarqui Dec 2 #2
manor321 Dec 2 #3
Roland99 Dec 3 #41
Me. Dec 2 #4
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #6
Me. Dec 2 #7
Roland99 Dec 2 #8
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #9
Roland99 Dec 2 #10
George II Dec 2 #14
Roland99 Dec 2 #17
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #21
Haggis for Breakfast Dec 2 #24
C_U_L8R Dec 2 #11
George II Dec 2 #15
Haggis for Breakfast Dec 2 #25
George II Dec 2 #26
Roland99 Dec 2 #29
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #30
Roland99 Dec 2 #31
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #33
Roland99 Dec 2 #34
Hermit-The-Prog Dec 2 #36
Roland99 Dec 2 #37
superpatriotman Dec 2 #38
Pepsidog Dec 2 #32
Roland99 Dec 2 #35
triron Dec 2 #39
Roland99 Dec 3 #42

Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:04 PM

1. More... (on M$M incompetence)

11/ During the 24-hour span the deal was signed, Trump told NBC that PUTIN WAS AWARE of everything happening in and around the '13 Miss Universe pageant—as if that hadn't already been evident from him permitting the pageant and supplying Trump and Agalarov with money and permits.

12/ As you can see from the pic atop this thread, not only did Trump and Putin's real estate developer have a site picked out (the Crocus City Complex in Moscow), not only did they have money and permits, they also had a design for the building—and the blessing of Vladimir Putin.

13/ There is only *one* reason the US media doesn't treat the Trump-Agalarov Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent as being a far *bigger* scandal (because of Putin's involvement, and Agalarov being a Putin agent, and the level to which the deal advanced) than the Trump-Rozov deal.

14/ The *one* reason for the media's indifference to the Trump-Agalarov deal—i.e., the reason the nation was *rocked* this week by news of the Trump-Rozov deal but has hardly registered the Trump-Agalarov deal at all—is because (get this) Trump's team says the deal ended in 2014.

15/ You might well be surprised to hear that *the Trump team making a claim about when a deal ended* is being treated as *gospel* by the very same media that reported this week...

...that Trump's team lied repeatedly about when the *Trump-Rozov* deal was active. Very odd, right?

16/ Some of us who research the Trump-Russia case *never* take the Trump team's word for *anything*. We look for *evidence* of whether (and when) something actually happened, not when (or whether) members of Trump's consistently dishonest team conveniently say something happened.

17/ Question: when does AGALAROV say the Trump-Agalarov Letter of Intent for a Putin-blessed Trump Tower Moscow expired?

Answer: February 2017.

He said so in an interview with a Russian construction website. This feed—which translates foreign news articles—was first to note it.

18/ Question: when does AGALAROV'S SON say the Trump-Agalarov Letter of Intent for a Putin-blessed Trump Tower Moscow expired?

Answer: July '17—*maybe*.

Emin Agalarov told Forbes then that the Agalarovs are STILL WORKING with Don and Eric on the Trump-Agalarov Trump Tower deal

19/ But wait! you say. Can't there only be *one* Trump Tower Moscow deal at a time? Isn't the signing of a Letter of Intent on the Trump-Rozov tower proof that the Trump-Agalarov tower deal was dead by October 2015, as Don Jr.—who's repeatedly lied to Congress—has been claiming?

20/ No—as Trump has repeatedly said he wants to build a *ton* of buildings in Moscow. There's no mutually exclusive relationship between the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals. We don't even know what the two towers would've been called—we say Trump Tower Moscow as a shorthand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:20 PM

5. More more...

21/ So now let's look at what the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals have in common:

Every person involved in both projects *lied* about every single aspect of the project to the public, the media and politicians.

The Kremlin was involved in the negotiations for *both*.

22/ But it's for *legal* reasons that the Trump-Agalarov deal is far *more* dangerous to Trump than the Trump-Rozov deal, which is why it's wildly to the benefit of the administration that so far—for no evident reason—the media has ignored the Trump-Agalarov deal almost entirely.

23/ Federal BRIBERY statutes are triggered—at the earliest—when a person has been *selected or nominated* to be a federal public official. Trump clinched the GOP nomination for president May 26, 2016; was nominated on July 19; was elected November 8; took office January 20, 2017.

24/ Here's more information on this and other relevant federal corruption statutes:
https://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/public-integrity/a_guide_to_commonly_used_federal_statutes_in_public_corruption_cases.pdf

25/ This timeline— see Tweet 23—suggests it's vital for Trump to claim that the Trump-Rozov deal was dead by July 2016, not because we know SCOTUS would consider the GOP nomination an eligible "selection" by statute, but because if you're going to lie anyway, why not be cautious?

26/ So we'd expect Trump to claim, to be safe, that the Trump-Rozov deal was entirely dead by June '16—which is *exactly* the information we have now. But we can't know if Michael Cohen has given Mueller more information on the timeline that we haven't yet seen in a court filing.

27/ Now let's look at the Trump-Agalarov deal, which was signed 11 MONTHS AFTER Roger Stone says Trump told him he was running for president, and 1 MONTH BEFORE Trump indicated as much to New York GOP officials. That deal lasted... well into 2017, triggering the bribery statute.

28/ So what was the quid pro quo? Trump gets a multi-billion dollar investment in Moscow; what does Moscow get for its bribe? First, let's note that Steele dossier intelligence—compiled by the former Russia desk head for MI6—says the Kremlin used real estate deals to bribe Trump.


29/ The answer is the same answer for nearly *all* bribery cases: a nominated federal public official promises a policy intended to benefit the person who bribed him. Here, the policy Trump offered was the *unilateral dropping of all sanctions on Russia*—worth TRILLIONS to Putin.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:38 PM

12. Still going! Seth is the Energizer Tweeter (Kremlin Agents wrote trump foreign policy)

30/ So here's another thing the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals have in common:

We know that during the conception of *both* deals, Trump was *openly discussing* his historically pro-Russia foreign policy with his Russian partners—a policy offering NO BENEFIT TO AMERICA.

31/ So now here's *another* vital thing the two deals have in common:

In both the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals, there is evidence that Trump's business partners had chosen to do business with him (a) with Kremlin guidance, and (b) *because of* Trump's foreign policy.

32/ Okay, you say, but what if Trump's historically pro-Russia foreign policy, which offered no benefit to America whatsoever, was simply Trump's *sincerely held belief*? Do we know, for instance, who WROTE his foreign policy?

As it so happens we do. It was THREE KREMLIN AGENTS.


33/ Here, again, we come to a part of the story that the media is refusing to widely report not because it isn't provably true but because it's *so insane* that it sounds impossible. And I'm saying it directly here: it sounds impossible. I didn't believe it when I first heard it.

34/ Manafort says *he* didn't write Trump's Russia policy, which was delivered to voters at Trump's so-called Mayflower Speech on April 27, 2016. So who did? Well, it was written and reviewed by Richard Burt, a Gazprom lobbyist; Dimitri Simes, a friend of Putin; and Papadopoulos.

35/ Trump put Papadopoulos on his speech-writing team the DAY AFTER Papadopoulos told him that he—Papadopoulos—was acting as a Kremlin intermediary for an agent of Putin. And what did that agent tell Papadopoulos the day BEFORE the Mayflower Speech? That Putin had Clinton emails.

36/ But BRIBERY is the hardest way to charge all this. CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES includes "any conspiracy for the purpose of defeating the lawful function of any department of government...to impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operation as fair..."

37/ Trump entered office with a plan to force the State Department to drop sanctions on Russia for no reason. The plan was defeated only when State Department officials REVOLTED against Trump's policy—which would have destroyed the fair operation of the DoS/DoT sanctions program.

38/ As with the BRIBERY statute—which doesn't require that a federal official actually be capable of delivering on an induced promise—CONSPIRACY doesn't require that one be in a position of being able to commit a crime at the time the conspiracy is hatched. That fits these facts.

39/ *Both* the Trump-Agalarov *and* the Trump-Rozov deals present as part of a CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES, with both documentary and testimonial evidence establishing the quid pro quo, the agreement and its purpose, and steps in furtherance of the illegal conspiracy.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:50 PM

13. Good compilation. I'm sure Mueller's is aware of most if not all of this. Otherwise, send it to him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:51 PM

16. I'd be willing to be some on Mueller's team follows Seth or

Maddow or LincolnsBible or SpicyFiles

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:53 PM

18. SpicyFiles' stuff is so intricate and involved I can't keep track of it on twitter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:55 PM

19. Yeah. She gets so far into details and legalese. It's beyond me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:14 PM

23. And EmptyWheel - such detailed knowledge and descriptions. Kudos to these investigators!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:57 PM

20. Next part of thread...claiming it's bribery now!

40/ Because the Trump-Agalarov deal extended beyond Election Day and into the Trump presidency, it presents *also* as a BRIBERY case. But there's another critical way in which the—already lied about—timeline of the Trump-Agalarov deal suggests that it was in fact a criminal act.

41/ If you know someone is committing a criminal act, you can't do anything to INDUCE THEM to keep committing that act, and inducement often involves payment as well as encouragement. The AIDING AND ABETTING statute means Trump couldn't induce Russian crimes once he knew of them.

42/ So now we see a *second* reason it's so suspiciously convenient that the Trump-Rozov deal "ended" in June 2016. It's not just because it preceded Trump's nomination for president, but because it preceded—or was contemporaneous with—Russian hacking activities becoming public.

43/ For nearly two years, this feed has not only meticulously detailed how Trump's foreign policy was developed, and when/where he signed deals with the Russians, but *also* how *long* his team's sanctions negotiations with the Russians went on *after* it knew of Russian hacking.

44/ *After* we knew of Russian hacking, Trump's NatSec negotiated sanctions *at a minimum* at the RNC, in Sessions' office, in *pre-election* Flynn-Kislyak talks, and through "public collusion" like a Papadopoulos-Interfax interview, Jr.'s emails to WikiLeaks, and Trump speeches.

45/ Throughout all of this, Russia was holding out an ACTIVE Trump Tower Moscow deal for Trump via Aras Agalarov, who NOT ONLY stayed in contact with Trump throughout the election but tried to get oppo research to Trump on Clinton and offered to secretly introduce Trump to Putin.

46/ Given the foregoing—and despite having written a book on Trump-Russia collusion entitled PROOF OF COLLUSION that answers many of the mysteries surrounding Trump's collusion with Russia—I cannot *fathom* why media speaks of the Trump-Rozov deal but not the Trump-Agalarov deal.

47/ And given all the foregoing—given the BRIBERY, CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES and AIDING AND ABETTING COMPUTER CRIMES federal statutory violations that are clearly in play here—I've *no idea* why *anyone* in media refers to these two deals as *legal*. They *weren't*.

48/ What happened this week was *not* that we got proof of collusion. We already *had* proof of collusion, and it's catalogued in detail in my book PROOF OF COLLUSION. What we got was *more* proof of collusion. And if people wonder why it doesn't feel that way, look at the media.

49/ The mistake the media makes is giving Trump hours of airtime denying his crimes—though his denials are *less* credible than a murderer saying he didn't murder someone, as Trump *lies more frequently* than any murderer I've ever represented in court or even *seen* represented.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 10:45 PM

40. Legal sourcing for #36

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:13 PM

22. Wrapping it up...

50/ Likewise, media credits and indulges those who've lied on Trump's behalf before—while ignoring hard evidence of criminality because it seems implausible. Newsflash: sometimes crimes present, at first, as implausible. Media needs to move past that and report what we know. /end

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #22)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:22 PM

27. now, can it all fit in the OP?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #27)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:29 PM

28. Lol. I'll update it. Well. It's ALL in post 29

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:11 PM

3. It is a scandal that the MSM doesn't cover this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 3, 2018, 09:33 AM

41. It's sourced to the hilt. But then again, they all fell in line on WMDs too

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:18 PM

4. Such An Ugly Building

+1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:25 PM

6. looks twisted -- thus appropriate

Twisted Twitler TrumPutin's twisted tower.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:27 PM

7. Good One!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:29 PM

8. Con's Crooked Citadel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:33 PM

9. thanks for threadreaderapp link and story!

Looks like you're keeping the OP updated, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:34 PM

10. Yeah. Twitter threads are a pita

I’ve gotten adept at cut n paste on a phone

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:51 PM

14. If Putin houses his hookers there, it could be called "Leaning Tower of Pissers"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:53 PM

17. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:12 PM

21. i needed that laugh


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:18 PM

24. Oh George,

That was awesome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:36 PM

11. Fugly.

That's architectural malpractice right there. I don't know if anyone could make an uglier building if they tried.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 08:51 PM

15. They're not buildings, but have you seen Melania's blood-red "trees"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:19 PM

25. Did you see her trees LAST year ?

Not that the trees from Hell are better, but good god, how can a woman who is supposed to have such exquisite taste screw up so badly two years in a row ??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Haggis for Breakfast (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:20 PM

26. As I've said elsewhere, all her taste is in her mouth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:31 PM

29. FULL TWITTER THREAD

Thread by @SethAbramson: "THREAD) It's time for America to discuss the SECOND Letter of Intent that Trump signed to build a Trump Tower Moscow—a Letter that was acti […]"
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1069389861537423360.html

(THREAD) It's time for America to discuss the SECOND Letter of Intent that Trump signed to build a Trump Tower Moscow—a Letter that was active two years earlier than the one we learned of this week and that remained active through 2017. I hope you'll read on for more and RETWEET.


1/ The picture atop this thread is of the "Trump-Agalarov" Trump Tower Moscow—the Trump Tower Moscow that Trump signed a Letter of Intent to build in November 2013 with the direct intervention and assistance of the Kremlin. This Letter was ACTIVE through mid-2017 at the earliest.

2/ Nobody who researches the Trump-Russia case extensively would say that the "Trump-Rozov" Trump Tower Moscow deal—the one we learned of this week—is any *less* nefarious than the "Trump-Agalarov" deal. The problem is *no one seems to fully understand the issue with either one*.

3/ Trump has thus far had success—inexplicably—in convincing media that there was no criminality in him secretly negotiating a multi-billion dollar real estate deal directly with the Kremlin while he was running for president on the most pro-Russia foreign policy in U.S. history.

4/ In fact, both the "Trump-Agalarov" Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent (active: November 2013, at the latest, through mid-2017 or later) and the "Trump-Rozov" Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent (active: October 2015, at the latest, through June 2016 or later) were *criminal*.

5/ To understand why BOTH these Letters of Intent became criminal at some point in their lifespan—whether or not they were illegal at the outset (which the Trump-Rozov Letter might well have been)—requires looking at their histories and shared features and some relevant statutes.

6/ First, we'll look at the history of the "Trump-Agalarov" Letter of Intent that Trump signed in November 2013 (at the latest), which was ACTIVE until its termination sometime in mid-2017 (at the earliest). We know far *more* of the Trump-Agalarov deal than the Trump-Rozov deal.

7/ Agalarov is FAR CLOSER to Vladimir Putin than Trump's partner in the Trump-Rozov deal, Andrey Rozov. Agalarov is Putin's top real estate developer, and was awarded Russia's highest civilian award directly from Putin's hand—two weeks before Trump and Agalarov signed their deal.

8/ A Russian oligarch, Agalarov routinely performs no-bid government contracts for the Kremlin, and is considered a top Putin ally. Moreover, Agalarov and his family members have acted as messengers for Putin, and have discussed their proclivity to do as the Kremlin directs them.

9/ Trump and Agalarov signed their Trump Tower deal in early November 2013, at an EVENT Putin personally permitted to occur (the 2013 Miss Universe pageant), with money from a STATE BANK whose loans Putin can direct, and with the permission of a KREMLIN OFFICIAL Putin controlled.

10/ On the *very day* in November 2013 that Trump and Agalarov signed their multi-billion dollar Trump Tower Moscow deal, Trump received a CALL FROM THE KREMLIN—either directly from Putin or from his lieutenant, Dmitry Peskov—and a WRITTEN MESSAGE FROM PUTIN. But that's not all.

11/ During the 24-hour span the deal was signed, Trump told NBC that PUTIN WAS AWARE of everything happening in and around the '13 Miss Universe pageant—as if that hadn't already been evident from him permitting the pageant and supplying Trump and Agalarov with money and permits.

12/ As you can see from the pic atop this thread, not only did Trump and Putin's real estate developer have a site picked out (the Crocus City Complex in Moscow), not only did they have money and permits, they also had a design for the building—and the blessing of Vladimir Putin.

13/ There is only *one* reason the US media doesn't treat the Trump-Agalarov Trump Tower Moscow Letter of Intent as being a far *bigger* scandal (because of Putin's involvement, and Agalarov being a Putin agent, and the level to which the deal advanced) than the Trump-Rozov deal.

14/ The *one* reason for the media's indifference to the Trump-Agalarov deal—i.e., the reason the nation was *rocked* this week by news of the Trump-Rozov deal but has hardly registered the Trump-Agalarov deal at all—is because (get this) Trump's team says the deal ended in 2014.

15/ You might well be surprised to hear that *the Trump team making a claim about when a deal ended* is being treated as *gospel* by the very same media that reported this week...

...that Trump's team lied repeatedly about when the *Trump-Rozov* deal was active. Very odd, right?

16/ Some of us who research the Trump-Russia case *never* take the Trump team's word for *anything*. We look for *evidence* of whether (and when) something actually happened, not when (or whether) members of Trump's consistently dishonest team conveniently say something happened.

17/ Question: when does AGALAROV say the Trump-Agalarov Letter of Intent for a Putin-blessed Trump Tower Moscow expired?

Answer: February 2017.

He said so in an interview with a Russian construction website. This feed—which translates foreign news articles—was first to note it.

18/ Question: when does AGALAROV'S SON say the Trump-Agalarov Letter of Intent for a Putin-blessed Trump Tower Moscow expired?

Answer: July '17—*maybe*.

Emin Agalarov told Forbes then that the Agalarovs are STILL WORKING with Don and Eric on the Trump-Agalarov Trump Tower deal

19/ But wait! you say. Can't there only be *one* Trump Tower Moscow deal at a time? Isn't the signing of a Letter of Intent on the Trump-Rozov tower proof that the Trump-Agalarov tower deal was dead by October 2015, as Don Jr.—who's repeatedly lied to Congress—has been claiming?

20/ No—as Trump has repeatedly said he wants to build a *ton* of buildings in Moscow. There's no mutually exclusive relationship between the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals. We don't even know what the two towers would've been called—we say Trump Tower Moscow as a shorthand.

21/ So now let's look at what the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals have in common:

Every person involved in both projects *lied* about every single aspect of the project to the public, the media and politicians.

The Kremlin was involved in the negotiations for *both*.

22/ But it's for *legal* reasons that the Trump-Agalarov deal is far *more* dangerous to Trump than the Trump-Rozov deal, which is why it's wildly to the benefit of the administration that so far—for no evident reason—the media has ignored the Trump-Agalarov deal almost entirely.

23/ Federal BRIBERY statutes are triggered—at the earliest—when a person has been *selected or nominated* to be a federal public official. Trump clinched the GOP nomination for president May 26, 2016; was nominated on July 19; was elected November 8; took office January 20, 2017.

24/ Here's more information on this and other relevant federal corruption statutes:
https://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites/public-integrity/a_guide_to_commonly_used_federal_statutes_in_public_corruption_cases.pdf

25/ This timeline— see Tweet 23—suggests it's vital for Trump to claim that the Trump-Rozov deal was dead by July 2016, not because we know SCOTUS would consider the GOP nomination an eligible "selection" by statute, but because if you're going to lie anyway, why not be cautious?

26/ So we'd expect Trump to claim, to be safe, that the Trump-Rozov deal was entirely dead by June '16—which is *exactly* the information we have now. But we can't know if Michael Cohen has given Mueller more information on the timeline that we haven't yet seen in a court filing.

27/ Now let's look at the Trump-Agalarov deal, which was signed 11 MONTHS AFTER Roger Stone says Trump told him he was running for president, and 1 MONTH BEFORE Trump indicated as much to New York GOP officials. That deal lasted... well into 2017, triggering the bribery statute.

28/ So what was the quid pro quo? Trump gets a multi-billion dollar investment in Moscow; what does Moscow get for its bribe? First, let's note that Steele dossier intelligence—compiled by the former Russia desk head for MI6—says the Kremlin used real estate deals to bribe Trump.


29/ The answer is the same answer for nearly *all* bribery cases: a nominated federal public official promises a policy intended to benefit the person who bribed him. Here, the policy Trump offered was the *unilateral dropping of all sanctions on Russia*—worth TRILLIONS to Putin.

30/ So here's another thing the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals have in common:

We know that during the conception of *both* deals, Trump was *openly discussing* his historically pro-Russia foreign policy with his Russian partners—a policy offering NO BENEFIT TO AMERICA.

31/ So now here's *another* vital thing the two deals have in common:

In both the Trump-Agalarov and Trump-Rozov deals, there is evidence that Trump's business partners had chosen to do business with him (a) with Kremlin guidance, and (b) *because of* Trump's foreign policy.

32/ Okay, you say, but what if Trump's historically pro-Russia foreign policy, which offered no benefit to America whatsoever, was simply Trump's *sincerely held belief*? Do we know, for instance, who WROTE his foreign policy?

As it so happens we do. It was THREE KREMLIN AGENTS.


33/ Here, again, we come to a part of the story that the media is refusing to widely report not because it isn't provably true but because it's *so insane* that it sounds impossible. And I'm saying it directly here: it sounds impossible. I didn't believe it when I first heard it.

34/ Manafort says *he* didn't write Trump's Russia policy, which was delivered to voters at Trump's so-called Mayflower Speech on April 27, 2016. So who did? Well, it was written and reviewed by Richard Burt, a Gazprom lobbyist; Dimitri Simes, a friend of Putin; and Papadopoulos.

35/ Trump put Papadopoulos on his speech-writing team the DAY AFTER Papadopoulos told him that he—Papadopoulos—was acting as a Kremlin intermediary for an agent of Putin. And what did that agent tell Papadopoulos the day BEFORE the Mayflower Speech? That Putin had Clinton emails.

36/ But BRIBERY is the hardest way to charge all this. CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES includes "any conspiracy for the purpose of defeating the lawful function of any department of government...to impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operation as fair..."

37/ Trump entered office with a plan to force the State Department to drop sanctions on Russia for no reason. The plan was defeated only when State Department officials REVOLTED against Trump's policy—which would have destroyed the fair operation of the DoS/DoT sanctions program.

38/ As with the BRIBERY statute—which doesn't require that a federal official actually be capable of delivering on an induced promise—CONSPIRACY doesn't require that one be in a position of being able to commit a crime at the time the conspiracy is hatched. That fits these facts.

39/ *Both* the Trump-Agalarov *and* the Trump-Rozov deals present as part of a CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES, with both documentary and testimonial evidence establishing the quid pro quo, the agreement and its purpose, and steps in furtherance of the illegal conspiracy.

40/ Because the Trump-Agalarov deal extended beyond Election Day and into the Trump presidency, it presents *also* as a BRIBERY case. But there's another critical way in which the—already lied about—timeline of the Trump-Agalarov deal suggests that it was in fact a criminal act.

41/ If you know someone is committing a criminal act, you can't do anything to INDUCE THEM to keep committing that act, and inducement often involves payment as well as encouragement. The AIDING AND ABETTING statute means Trump couldn't induce Russian crimes once he knew of them.

42/ So now we see a *second* reason it's so suspiciously convenient that the Trump-Rozov deal "ended" in June 2016. It's not just because it preceded Trump's nomination for president, but because it preceded—or was contemporaneous with—Russian hacking activities becoming public.

43/ For nearly two years, this feed has not only meticulously detailed how Trump's foreign policy was developed, and when/where he signed deals with the Russians, but *also* how *long* his team's sanctions negotiations with the Russians went on *after* it knew of Russian hacking.

44/ *After* we knew of Russian hacking, Trump's NatSec negotiated sanctions *at a minimum* at the RNC, in Sessions' office, in *pre-election* Flynn-Kislyak talks, and through "public collusion" like a Papadopoulos-Interfax interview, Jr.'s emails to WikiLeaks, and Trump speeches.

45/ Throughout all of this, Russia was holding out an ACTIVE Trump Tower Moscow deal for Trump via Aras Agalarov, who NOT ONLY stayed in contact with Trump throughout the election but tried to get oppo research to Trump on Clinton and offered to secretly introduce Trump to Putin.

46/ Given the foregoing—and despite having written a book on Trump-Russia collusion entitled PROOF OF COLLUSION that answers many of the mysteries surrounding Trump's collusion with Russia—I cannot *fathom* why media speaks of the Trump-Rozov deal but not the Trump-Agalarov deal.

47/ And given all the foregoing—given the BRIBERY, CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES and AIDING AND ABETTING COMPUTER CRIMES federal statutory violations that are clearly in play here—I've *no idea* why *anyone* in media refers to these two deals as *legal*. They *weren't*.

48/ What happened this week was *not* that we got proof of collusion. We already *had* proof of collusion, and it's catalogued in detail in my book PROOF OF COLLUSION. What we got was *more* proof of collusion. And if people wonder why it doesn't feel that way, look at the media.

49/ The mistake the media makes is giving Trump hours of airtime denying his crimes—though his denials are *less* credible than a murderer saying he didn't murder someone, as Trump *lies more frequently* than any murderer I've ever represented in court or even *seen* represented.

50/ Likewise, media credits and indulges those who've lied on Trump's behalf before—while ignoring hard evidence of criminality because it seems implausible. Newsflash: sometimes crimes present, at first, as implausible. Media needs to move past that and report what we know. /end

PS/ Other points: Ivanka, Don, and Eric have *all* been actively involved in the Agalarov deal; Emin lied about the deal's timeline to Forbes; the involvement of Sberbank and an architectural firm suggest the tower was beyond LoI stage *and* conceived *before* early November '13.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:38 PM

30. is TREASON in addition to the 3 crimes listed?

Just asking.

I'd settle for some serious reporting of BRIBERY, CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES, and AIDING AND ABETTING COMPUTER CRIMES on corporate media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #30)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:49 PM

31. IMO? Hell yeah! BTW. Seth posted a PS...

PS/ Other points: Ivanka, Don, and Eric have *all* been actively involved in the Agalarov deal; Emin lied about the deal's timeline to Forbes; the involvement of Sberbank and an architectural firm suggest the tower was beyond LoI stage *and* conceived *before* early November '13.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #31)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:53 PM

33. wasn't Agalarov's jet following Trump around during campaign?

I remember a few stories pointing out an oligarch's jet nearby every time Trump was at Mar-wtf-ever and elsewhere.

gonna dig around the bookmarks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to Hermit-The-Prog (Reply #36)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 10:08 PM

37. Tom Barrack, Steve Schwarzman and russian oligarchs in Dubai for Saudi Investment Conf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #29)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 10:20 PM

38. Well done

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:53 PM

32. The trick is to distill this info into a form that the public can understand

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pepsidog (Reply #32)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 09:56 PM

35. Yeah. Needs to be a daily 3-5min segment on every nightly news program

ABC, NBC and CBS

Even CBS gets like 2-3 times the ratings of top cable networks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2018, 10:27 PM

39. knr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2018, 10:03 AM

42. Greg Olear thread on the Rosneft angle. Great summation on the related scandal

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1068891358096752645.html

In light of this week’s Trump/Russia revelations, let’s talk about Rosneft, the Russian oil company.

Did Trump make a secret deal with Russia, as the Steele dossier reports?

[THREAD]

1/ Steele observes that Igor Sechin, CEO of Rosneft, “was so keen to lift personal and corporate western sanctions imposed on the company, that he offered [Carter] PAGE/TRUMP’s associates the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatized) stake in Rosneft in return.”

2/ Wherefore Sechin’s keenness? Well, Rosneft is majority owned by the Government of Russia — in other words, Vladimir Putin and his circle of oligarchs, a group that includes Sechin, a longtime Vova crony.

3/ In 2012, Rosneft entered into a $500 billion joint venture with ExxonMobil, which at the time was run by Trump’s former Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. Rexxon was subsequently awarded a friendship medal by Putin.

4/ The oil reserves in the Arctic, the impetus for the joint venture, are estimated to contain 85 billion barrels. At a conservative price of $50 a barrel, that amounts to a staggering $4.25 trillion in potential gross revenue. Trillion, with a “T.”

5/ These are dizzying numbers — but Putin will not see a kopek as long as the US continues to impose sanctions on Russia.

Small wonder, then, that Sechin wanted those sanctions lifted.

6/ Here’s where it gets interesting: As Steele predicted, Rosneft DID sell off a percentage of its ownership — 19.5 percent, almost exactly what he’d reported — in January 2017.

7/ The details of the transaction were predictably murky, with shell companies selling to other shell companies, who were owned by different shell companies, and so on to infinity.

8/ Qatar was prominently involved, and Marc Rich’s Glencore, but it took almost a year for Reuters to figure out who ponied up an additional 2.2 billion euros for the deal.

9/ Turns out, the secret financier of the sale of a fifth of Russia’s largest oil company…was Russia’s largest bank. (Cue: sad trombone music). The attempt to lure foreign investment to Russia was a miserable failure.

10/ We do not know if Trump accepted the Rosneft brokerage offer — indeed, there is no evidence to suggest that he was even aware of it — and Carter Page has vehemently denied his alleged role.

11/ Complicating matters, too many commentators have circulated the falsehood that Trump was offered the full 19% of Rosneft. That’s crazy talk. Trump’s price is much lower than a full fifth of Russia’s premier oil company.

12/ Moreover, this is not what Steele reports: “he offered PAGE/TRUMP’s associates THE BROKERAGE of up to a 19 per cent (privatized) stake in Rosneft….”

The brokerage on a sale is not the thing being sold.

13/ To me, the most interesting (potential) clue is this little discrepancy: Steele reported that the stake would be 19 percent; the actual amount sold was 19.5 percent. Assuming Steele is correct, wherefore this extra half a percent?

14/ What if the discrepancy between the 19 percent reported by Steele and the 19.5 percent of the actual sale—roughly $277 million—WAS the commission of the sale?

15/ What if Putin offered Trump, through various intermediaries (Page? Papadopoulos? Sater? Cohen? There were plenty available), one half of one percent of the company’s market value as commission, in exchange for lifting sanctions?

16/ We need to start looking for reasons why Trump would have been tempted by a one-time lump-sum cash infusion of some $277 million in late 2016.

17/ Like, for example, the fact that Trump owed almost exactly that amount to his largest known creditor, Deutsche Bank.

18/ The same Deutsche Bank that was fined for participating in a huge Russian money laundering scheme involving “mirror trades.”

The same Deutsche Bank whose corporate offices are being raided by German federal investigators as you read this.

19/ Might the Rosneft commission have been used to pay off Trump’s Deutsche Bank obligations, the same way a parent might write a check directly to AMEX to pay off the son’s credit card balance?

20/ The late Fred Trump made a habit of bailing out his profligate son when he was too far in the red. Perhaps Trump’s Russian sugar daddy similarly helped relieve him of onerous debt?

21/ This information might be in his tax returns, which might explain why Trump has not released them.

22/ To reiterate, this is speculation on my part, based largely on reporting by Christopher Steele in a dossier the GOP and the MSM love to point out is “unverified.”

But it is safe to conclude, after this revelatory week, that Christopher Steele’s word is infinitely more credible than the serial lies of Donald Trump and his minions.

[END]
PS/ Full article below, with more detail and links. Please share. Thanks!

https://medium.com/@gregolear/rosneft-revisited-did-trump-do-a-deal-in-russia-b2dfda6ce310

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread